Top Banner

Click here to load reader

Turretin - Justification

Jul 17, 2016

ReportDownload

Documents

justification

  • Turrettin

    on Justification

    Francis Turrettin

    2009

    Doxa Digital Press

    Lake Monroe, FL

  • Front Matter

    Turrettin on Justification

    Translated by George Musgrave Giger

    Sixteenth Topic of Institutes of Elenctic Theology

    Lake Monroe, FL

    Doxa Digital Press

    2009

  • Front Matter .................................................................................................................................. 2

    1. Justification As Forensic .................................................................................................. 4

    2. A False Foundation ................................................................................................................ 9

    3. The True Foundation ............................................................................................................ 21

    4. Remission and Adoption ...................................................................................................... 35

    5. The Remission of Sins ........................................................................................................ 40

    6. Adoption .................................................................................................................................. 49

    7. The Justification of Faith .............................................................................................. 53

    8. Justification by Faith Alone .......................................................................................... 62

    9. The Time of Justification ................................................................................................ 72

    10. The Unity of Justification ............................................................................................ 77

  • 1

    1.

    Justification As Forensic

    Is the word justification always used in a forensic sense in this argument, or

    also in a moral and physical? The former we affirm, the latter we deny, against

    the Romanists.

    As in the chain of salvation justification follows vocation, Rom. 8:30, and is

    everywhere set forth as the primary effect of faith, the topic concerning vocation

    and faith begets the topic concerning justification, which must be handled with

    the greater care and accuracy as this saving doctrine is of the greatest importance

    in religion. It is called by Luther, the article of a standing and falling church; by

    other Christians it is termed the characteristic and basis of Christianity not

    without reason, the principal rampart of the Christian religion, and, it being

    adulterated or subverted, it is impossible to retain purity of doctrine in other

    places. Whence Satan in every way has endeavored to corrupt this doctrine in all

    ages; as has been done especially in the Papacy: for which reason it is deservedly

    placed among the primary causes of our secession from the Romish Church and

    of the Reformation.

    2

    Although, however, some of the more candid Romanists, conquered by the

    force of the truth, have felt and expressed themselves more soundly than

    others concerning this article; nor are there wanting also some among our

    divines, who influenced by a desire to lessen controversies, think there

    is not so great matter for dispute about it, and that there are here not

    a few logomachies: still it is certain that up to this time there are

    between us and the Romanists in this argument controversies not verbal,

    but real, many and of great importance, as will be made manifest in what

    follows.

    Because from a false and preposterous explanation of the word, the truth

    of the thing itself has been wonderfully obscured, in the first place,

    its genuine sense, and in this question most especially, must be unfolded,

    which being settled we will be able the more easily to reach the nature

    of the thing itself.

    The verb htsdyq, to which the Greek dikaioun answers, and the Latin justificare, is used in two ways in the Scriptures, properly and improperly. Properly the verb is forensic, put for to absolve any one in

  • a trial, or to hold and to declare just, as opposed to the verb to condemn

    and to accuse, Exod. 23:7, Deut. 25:1, Prov. 17:15, Luke 18:14, Rom. 35. Thence apart from a trial it is used for to acknowledge and to praise one

    as just, and that too, either deservedly, as when it is terminated on God,

    in which way men are said to justify God, when they celebrate him as just,

    Ps. 51:4; wisdom is said to be justified of her children, Matt. 11:19,

    Luke 7:35, that is acknowledged and celebrated as such, or presumptuously,

    as the Pharisees are said to justify themselves. Luke 16:15. Improperly

    it is used either ministerially, for to bring to righteousness, Dan. 12:3,

    where mtsdyqy seems to be exegetical of mskylym; because while the preachers of the gospel instruct and teach believers, by this very thing

    they justify them ministerially, to wit, by teaching

    3

    them the true way in which they can be justified, in the same sense in which they

    are said to save them, 1 Tim. 4:16. Or by way of synecdoche, the antecedent being

    put for the consequent, for to free, Rom. 6:7, He that is dead is justified from

    sin, that is, freed. Or comparatively, Ezek. 16:51, 52, where on account of a

    comparison between the sins of Israel and Samaria, Israel is said to justify

    Samaria, and, the sins of Judah increasing, Judah is said to have justified Israel,

    Jer. 3:11, because Israel was more just than Judah, that is, her sins were fewer

    than the sins of Judah.

    Hence arises the Question with the Romanists, concerning the acceptation

    of this word, whether it is to be taken precisely in a forensic sense,

    in this affair; or, whether it ought also to be taken in a physical and

    moral sense for the infusion of righteousness and justification, if it

    is allowable so to speak, either by the acquisition or the increase of

    it? For they do not deny, indeed, that the word justificatio and the verb justificare are often taken in a forensic sense, and even in this affair, as Bellarmine, lib. i, de Justif., cap. i. Tirin., Contro. 15, nu. 1,

    Tolet., ad Rom. ii., Anno 13, and many others. But they do not wish this

    to be the constant meaning but that it often signifies a true production,

    acquisition, or increase of righteousness, and this is especially the case,

    when employed about the justification of man before God. Whence they

    distinguish justification into first and second. The first is that by

    which man who is unjust is made just, the second, by which a just man is

    made more just. Whence Bellarmine, lib. ii, cap. 2, Justification undoubtedly is a certain movement from sin to righteousness, and takes

    its name from the terminus to which it leads, as all other similar motions,

    illumination, calefaction; that is true justification, where some

    righteousness is acquired beyond the remission of sin. Thomas Aquinas, 1, 2, q. 113, Justification taken passively implies a motion to making

  • righteous, just as calefaction a motion to heat. Now although we do not deny that this word has

    4

    more than one signification, and is taken in different ways in the Scriptures, now

    properly, then improperly, as we have already said, still we maintain that it is

    never taken for an infusion of righteousness, but always as often as the Scriptures

    speak professedly concerning our justification, it must be explained as a forensic

    term.

    The reasons are: 1. Because the passages, which treat of justification,

    admit no other than a forensic sense, Job 9:3, Ps. 143:2, Rom. 3:28, and

    4:13, Acts 13:39, and elsewhere, where a judicial process is set forth, and mention is made of an accusing law, of accused persons, who are guilty,

    Rom. 3:19, of a handwriting contrary to us, Col. 2:14, of divine justice

    demanding punishment, Rom. 3:24, 26, of an advocate pleading the cause,

    1 John 2:1, of satisfaction and imputed righteousness, Rom. 45; of a throne of grace before which we are absolved, Heb. 4:16, of a judge

    pronouncing sentence, Rom. 3:20, and absolving sinners, Rom. 4:5.

    2. Because justification is here opposed to condemnation; Who shall lay anything to the charge of Gods elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? Rom. 8:33, 34. As therefore accusation and condemnation occur only in a trial; so also justification. Nor can it be

    conceived how God can be said to condemn or to justify, unless either by

    adjudging to punishment, or absolving us from it judicially, which Toletus

    is compelled to confess on this passage; The word justification in this place is taken with that signification, which is opposed to its antithesis,

    namely, condemnation, so that it is the same in this place to justify as

    to pronounce just, as a judge by his sentence absolves and pronounces

    innocent. Cornelius a Lapide, who otherwise earnestly strives to obscure the truth, still overcome by the force of the truth, acknowledges

    that God justifies, that is, absolves the threatened action of sin and

    the devil, and pronounces just.

    5

    3. Because the equivalent phrases, by which our justification is described;

    such as not to come into judgment, John 5:24; not to be condemned, John

    3:18; to remit sins, to impute righteousness, Rom. 4; to be reconciled,

    Rom. 5:10, 2 Cor.

Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.